Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.11108/kagis.2012.15.2.035

Land Value Analysis Using Space Syntax and GWR  

Kim, Hye-Young (Dept. of Geoinformatics, University of Seoul)
Jun, Chul-Min (Dept. of Geoinformatics, University of Seoul)
Publication Information
Journal of the Korean Association of Geographic Information Studies / v.15, no.2, 2012 , pp. 35-45 More about this Journal
Abstract
Existing studies on land values tend to show the use of simple euclidean distances as the accessibility variable and OLS as the analysis method. However, applying such euclidean distance-based accessibility to dense CBD areas has limitations in the incorporating the characteristics of network structure whereas using OLS, the typical method for non-spatial data, tends to exclude spatial effects of spatial data. In this study, we analyzed land values focusing on the revised accessibility variables and the analytical technique that can include spatial effects. First, we adopted space syntax theory in order to consider not simple shortest distances along the streets but distances based on street network structure. Second, we compared OLS with GWR that includes spatial effects. Third, we used different size grid-cells for the spatial units considering MAUP theory and applied them to Gangnam-gu area. Each cell was analyzed for overall influence of independent variables using OLS, and coefficients were presented by GWR which enables local analysis and visualization. As a result, we found that suggested accessibility variables have a meaningful effects for land value analyses, and we were able to verify that GWR produces improved results compared to OLS. Also, we observed that the resulting values vary depending on the sizes of spatial units.
Keywords
Land Value; Space Syntax; GWR; Spatial Effects; MAUP;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 문종민. 2004. 공간구조를 고려한 도심지역의 업종별 입지특성에 관한 연구. 세종대학교 대학원 석사학위논문. 75쪽.
2 민웅기. 2007. 지가변동에 따른 도시공간구조 분석. 전주대학교 대학원 박사학위논문. 181쪽.
3 손지완. 2010. GWR 방법을 통한 지가추정의 공간적 변동성 분석. 연세대학교 대학원 석사학위논문. 60쪽.
4 이성우. 2006. 공간계량모형응용. 박영사. 422쪽.
5 이인혜. 2010. Space Syntax를 활용한 공간 구조특성의 지가산정방식 도입에 관한 연구. 세종대학교 대학원 석사학위논문. 70쪽.
6 임현식, 김영욱, 반영운. 2002. 도시공간구조와 지가의 상호관련성에 관한 연구 : 인사동 지역을 중심으로. 대한건축학회 논문집 18(7): 133-140.   과학기술학회마을
7 정우화. 2009. 서울시 대중교통 이용자의 체류 공간 분포에 관한 연구. 경희대학교 대학원 석사학위논문. 64쪽.
8 정찬희, 윤재훈, 최무혁. 2010. 대구시 도심. 부도심정책이 도시공간발달에 미친 영향에 관한 연구 : 부도심계획 공간구조분석 및 각 생활권중심지구와의 접근성과 지가의 비교를 중심으로. 대한건축학회 논문집 26(11): 245-255.   과학기술학회마을
9 강찬덕. 2010. GWR 접근법을 활용한 부동산 감정평가 모형 연구 : 서울시 아파트를 사례로. 부동산연구 20(2):107-132.
10 김영욱. 2003. Space Syntax를 활용한 공간 구조속성과 공간사용패턴의 상호관련성 연구. 국토계획 38(4):7-17.
11 조동기. 2009. 건강 관련 삶의 질의 사회인구 학적 상관요인에 대한 공간분석. 한국인구학 32(3):1-20.
12 Akaike, H. 1974. A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic control 19(6):716-723.   DOI
13 Anselin, L. 1988. Spatial Econometrics: Methods and Models. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publichsers, Dordrecht, Netherlands. 304pp.
14 Carlton, M. and A.S. Fotheringham. 2009. Geographically weighted regression : white paper. http://ncg.nuim.ie/ncg/GWR/GWR_WhitePaper.pdf.
15 Farber, S. and M. Yates. 2006. A comparison of localized regression models in a hedonic price context. Canadian Journal of Regional Science 3:405-420.
16 Fotheringham, A.S., C. Brunsdon and M. Charlton. 2002. Geographically Weighted Regression: the Analysis of Spatially Varying Relationships. John Wiley and Sons Ltd, England. 282pp.
17 Hillier, B., R. Burdett, J. Peponis and A. Penn. 1987. Creating life: or, does architecture determine anything?. Architecture and Behaviour 3(3):233-250.
18 Hillier, B. 1996. Space is the Machine. Cambridge University Press.
19 Hillier, B. 2007. Space is the Machine. Cambridge University Press. 368pp.
20 Hillier, B. and J. Hanson. 1984. The Social Logic of Space. Cambridge University Press. 293pp.
21 Openshaw, S. 1984. The modifiable areal unit problem. Concepts and Techniques in Modern Geography 38. Norwich : Geo Books.
22 Peponis, J., C. Zimring and Y.K. Choi. 1990. Finding the building in wayfinding. Environment and Behaviour 25(5):555-590